On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On 06/16/2014 08:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: >> On 06/15/2014 11:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote: >>> Since there are sixteen variants of the library, I am providing sixteen >>> corresponding pkg-config files. When another program uses the library, >>> by using pkg-config in their Makefile (or other build system), it will >>> ensure that they are getting the right C preprocessor defines for the >>> chosen library variant. >>> >>> I don't really understand how this is "adding to the API" or results in >>> incompatibilities. Do other people think that doing this is a mistake? >>> Would it actually be better for the package not to provide pkg-config files? >> >> I personally think it's very desirable to add pkg-config files since it >> makes libraries much easier to use. >> >> However, submit them UPSTREAM, don't do them as downstream patches. I >> would only add them to the Fedora packaging once they've been accepted >> upstream. Otherwise it could create a situation where software developed >> on Fedora relies on .pc files and doesn't work on other distros, and the >> other way around: software developed on other distros won't use the nice >> pkg-config integration available on Fedora. >> >> And yes, I agree this is a new API. But a very useful new API, so please >> don't be discouraged here, just go through the upstream process. :) > > +1, + a 1000 even. .pc files are good, but please send them upstream. Yeah please send them upstream. There is *no* reason not to do so. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
